5cjxburmr

etween non-international armed conflict and internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots,isolated and sporadic acts of violence, and other acts of a similar nature. 3A variety of terms have been used to describe factual situations that often may becharacterized as non-international armed conflict.17.1.1.1 NIAC and Civil War. Civil war is a classic example of a noninternationalarmed conflict. For example, a non-international armed conflict could involve theopen rebellion of segments of a nation’s armed forces (sometimes called dissident armed forces)against the incumbent regime, each claiming to be the legitimate government. 4In some cases of civil war, the insurgent party has been recognized as a belligerent, and,at least in some respects, the law of international armed conflict would be applied by the Stateschoosing to recognize the insurgent party as a belligerent. 517.1.1.2 NIAC and Internal Armed Conflict. In some cases, the term internalarmed conflict is used as a synonym for non-international armed conflict. Such usage mayreflect a traditional definition of non-international armed conflict as only those armed conflictsoccurring within the borders of a single State. 6 Non-international armed conflicts, however, areclassified as such simply based on the status of the parties to the conflict, and sometimes occur inmore than one State. 7 The mere fact that an armed conflict occurs in more than one State andthus may be characterized as international “in scope” does not render it “international incharacter.” 817.1.1.3 Transnational or Internationalized NIACs. Sometimes the terms of“transnational” or “internationalized” are used to describe certain non-international armedconflicts.“Transnational” has been used to indicate that the non-international armed conflict takesplace in more than one State.3 Refer to § 3.4.2.2 (Distinguishing Armed Conflict From Internal Disturbances and Tensions).4 See, e.g., LIEBER CODE art. 150 (“Civil war is war between two or more portions of a country or state, eachcontending for the mastery of the whole, and each claiming to be the legitimate government. The term is alsosometimes applied to war of rebellion, when the rebellious provinces or portions of the state are contiguous to thosecontaining the seat of government.”).5 Refer to § 3.3.3 (State Recognition of Armed Groups as Belligerents).6 See, e.g., GC COMMENTARY 36 (“Speaking generally, it must be recognized that the conflicts referred to in Article3 [of the GC] are armed conflicts, with armed forces on either side engaged in hostilities—conflicts, in short, whichare in many respects similar to an international war, but take place within the confines of a single country.”).7 Refer to § 3.3.1 (International Armed Conflict and Non-International Armed Conflict).8 Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557, 630 (2006) (“The Court of Appeals thought, and the Government asserts, thatCommon Article 3 [of the 1949 Geneva Conventions] does not apply to Hamdan because the conflict with al Qaeda,being ‘‘international in scope,’’ does not qualify as a ‘‘conflict not of an international character.’’ 415 F. 3d, at 41.That reasoning is erroneous. The term ‘conflict not of an international character’ is used here in contradistinction toa conflict between nations.”).1011